Abstract
Objectives The shift toward more innovative and sustainable
primary care models in Italy leads policy makers
and clinicians to face difficult decisions between options
that are all regarded as potentially beneficial. In this study,
patient preferences for different primary care models in the
Tuscany region of Italy were elicited. The relative importance
of different attributes to the surveyed respondents
was then examined, as well as the rate at which individuals
trade between attributes and the relative value of different
service configurations.
Methods A discrete choice experiment survey explored
the following attributes in a stratified random sample of
6,970 adults: primary care provider, diagnostic facilities
and waiting time for the visit.
Results Respondents (3,263) were likely to prefer a
consultation by their own general practitioner (GP) and a
practice with many diagnostic facilities. The predicted
utilities of different service configurations have shown that
a ‘‘primary care centre’’ with many diagnostic facilities
was preferable to a ‘‘solo GP’’ model or a ‘‘group general
practice’’.
Conclusions The study demonstrated how a patient
choice model could be used by decision makers for
developing successful policies that takes into account different
healthcare needs, balancing responsiveness with care continuity, equity and appropriateness. Considering that a
primary care centre would perform better than a ‘‘solo
GP’’, especially for younger respondents and for those with
minor healthcare needs, for a more rapid diffusion of this
model policymakers and managers could direct the care of
primary care centres towards these targeted subgroups, at
least in the first phase.

Abstract
Objectives The shift toward more innovative and sustainable
primary care models in Italy leads policy makers
and clinicians to face difficult decisions between options
that are all regarded as potentially beneficial. In this study,
patient preferences for different primary care models in the
Tuscany region of Italy were elicited. The relative importance
of different attributes to the surveyed respondents
was then examined, as well as the rate at which individuals
trade between attributes and the relative value of different
service configurations.
Methods A discrete choice experiment survey explored
the following attributes in a stratified random sample of
6,970 adults: primary care provider, diagnostic facilities
and waiting time for the visit.
Results Respondents (3,263) were likely to prefer a
consultation by their own general practitioner (GP) and a
practice with many diagnostic facilities. The predicted
utilities of different service configurations have shown that
a ‘‘primary care centre’’ with many diagnostic facilities
was preferable to a ‘‘solo GP’’ model or a ‘‘group general
practice’’.
Conclusions The study demonstrated how a patient
choice model could be used by decision makers for
developing successful policies that takes into account different
healthcare needs, balancing responsiveness with care continuity, equity and appropriateness. Considering that a
primary care centre would perform better than a ‘‘solo
GP’’, especially for younger respondents and for those with
minor healthcare needs, for a more rapid diffusion of this
model policymakers and managers could direct the care of
primary care centres towards these targeted subgroups, at
least in the first phase.